The Effectiveness of Anti-Social Lifestyle Change Strategies: A Rapid Evidence Assessment

• In Event: Communities

Abstract

The decisions we make each day—where we live, with whom we live, and with whom we associate, whether we go to school and/or work, whether we drink or use drugs, and how we spend our leisure time—constitute lifestyle choices. According to the developers of the Risk Need Responsivity (RNR) model, anti-social lifestyles can be clearly distinguished from pro-social lifestyles. Consider the following indicators of an anti-social lifestyle: risky behaviors in terms of drug use and alcohol, lack of involvement in organized sports or leisure activities, lack of pro-social associates/ gang involvement, and lack of interest, and participation, in either education or work. Individuals with anti-social lifestyles are believed to be more likely to engage in criminal activities—and once identified, less likely to desist—than individuals with pro-social lifestyles. What interventions, services, or approaches effectively lead to change in lifestyle and leisure activities for offenders? To answer this question, the recent evaluation research on a range of interventions purported to be linked—directly or indirectly—to changes in anti-social lifestyles was reviewed. Five distinct types of interventions were identified: (1) individual treatment, (2) sports/leisure activities, (3) employment and education, (4) mentoring, and (5) other factors related to lifestyle change (i.e. peers, location/relocation).

Authors

• James Michael Byrne, University of Massachusetts, Lowell / Griffith University

• Jessica Ritchie, Griffith University